tv [untitled] July 25, 2013 1:30pm-2:01pm PDT
next to another store and the toy store could help the other store. we're lumping in other stores that are navigate small businesses. but just like people in this room stores with being lunged in with wal-mart and target and that's incorrect. i have some concerns about the pending legislation. supervisor breeds proposal is quite frightening. i think that it basically amounts to protection itching are certain uses and it negatively effects other businesses and small businesses while ben others. i think something that's not considered is if you prevent the
market from operating in full let's say you really are preventing other areas for rent they can't - i'd ask that you mrs. consider the jobs. there's never any jobs about the attorneys and the plumper and other professionals. i'd ask we pleas move forward with this study and move forward with a halt the current legislation >> thank you.
good afternoon, commissioners i'm pat i'm the of the triangle neighborhood association. d t n a is very supportive of this report that was generated probably the most comprehensive report we've seen. traditionally e typically this report was not pleasure able to read but not this one. the study sites really the converge of the multiple legislative propdz by supervisors, the proposals by neighborhood, d t and a being one the neighborhoods we had a
demonstrated need of the policy in our neighborhood which this commission adopted and that policy came in being about in a year to a year and a half with some due diligence in working with the planning department to come up with a policy that could work with the department and everybody who had to implement that. one of the things we recommend today is this process being proposed today is a process where there's public input. you have so many neighborhoods that have different needs and while we have those silos of the supervisors who want to have southern controls in their neighborhoods we want to make sure this is an open process.
and that we have seen and we know that very often a report can give you the results you want based on the scope. we want to make sure that the scope is board enough. so what we've submitted to you in the draft planning commission resolution i'd like to read to you our proposal. under the section of move forward. we are suggesting that the commission recommends that the issue of formula retail be studied with and this is our insertedtion with the consultant for the consideration of the strrldz. under finding we're recommending as the issues and complications
are numerous the commission recommends and changes be made based on data and research to sought. what we're sugd sigg the commission expects the staff to have an open permeate of the criteria for choosing the consultant and have regular feedback go sessions the staff will present the staff findings prior to the final hearings. any further public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed >> commissioner. >> i'm quite in support of moving ahead with that.
we've had the 2004 ballot measure after that i believe and the number of proposals we're facing with the board of supervisors with the formula retail controls which are all over the map in some ways. so i'm quite in support of that. one thing ms. hayward i'm quite interested in the number of conditional use permits we've looked over the years 93 i think it is. and fulfill 95 percent of those were approved. another 13 percent were withdrawn and only 12 were denied out right. what i want to know not now but in a followup memo are the types
of establishment that were approved and disapproved and withdrawn. the type of and who they were basically, i think from who they were we can kind of tell their sizes but whatever statical information you can give us to back up those numbers so we can see if we've really denied lows which we didn't like home depot or some smaller formula retailer that would be helpful. but t then your recommendation back to the supervisors kind of hold up on the legislation has some implications for the next item on the agenda >> commissioner. >> thank you for a very good
report and this is an extremely large issue but i want to urge you to talk about the history of formula retail. part of the changes that have occurred in lifestyle and technology and mobility but in those days like san francisco did most of their own shopping for their everyday good days such as food and hairdresser but if they needed an item that was a durableable item like fine clothing they'd go downtown. even from small towns my mother would travel in enjoying by ferry abuser there were no small clothing stores.
so people would travel to places where they accounted obtain as products. what happened the stores were so successful he decided to pit satellites into other parts of the city and eventually it became region listed and now international. so it's a subject we have to tread very careful on while we want to be careful and provided the support for san francisco we have to realize that people will travel if they desire a particular product they'll travel to wherever they can. some people will come to a
hardware store for a valuable product. it's not all cost situations. it's the perceived product that's aspire and there's cleanliness and unionism dress codes and maybe the feeling their held to a higher standard where the first name will back the product. so i think it's important as we assess those things we look at what drives people to formula retail and we can't lump them altogether. so then the other thing is i don't really believe that rents are as one speaker said they increase in rental prices or the
increase in values in one particular neighborhood is driven by formula retail establishment. their driven by the desire to be there. so because their for the social reasons or because of the restaurants or maybe the shops bring them there in the first time. the side effect is you're going to have higher land values and that's a desirable thing. the other thing in terms of formula retail it's wise for san francisco to have at least one repealable large retail formula establishments. i think about the establishments we've looked the orchard supply
we've not got in san francisco but people will go there because the products that aspire in some ways. some people are not going to go to the formula retail maybe they want a lawn mower or power tool but most of they're hard war needs they'll get at the local stores. i think it make sense to be careful but i'm in in favor of restricting the heights and other things. they restricted the banks so they wouldn't dominate the frontage. if you're going to restrict the use you're better off
restricting their senile and a lot of the retailers have ugly sicken and so they want to have huge sicken like 65 feet high and that's not important if people are mostly pedestrians. i think it's important when we do the analysis one of the restrictions has to do with the amount of formula retail within a 65 feet of listen i can't remember front and it's important to look at the entire neighborhood and to lump a one type of of formula retailers you
may have one of one type of and 7 of the other. you have to take into consideration. and avoid attacks at one particular industry. i think this borders on protectionism or embargoes that have never about successful even in war. i think we want to stay away from that kind of thing. and we didn't have any studies that are comparable. there maybe reasons why they don't have this kind of thing you can talk to folks in houston
or chicago and ask them. like boston has a density like san francisco. we can move slowly to figure out if we need bans in certainty neighbors. if we're going to broadened the number of neighborhoods maybe it should go into neighborhoods where none is allowed at all. and the question is whether it should be in the c-3 is another one. this is the recreational or center where people come from outside of san francisco. i'm a buildinger you know that sometimes, the formula retail if properly done we can bring in the visitors.
when they come into a neighborhood that was formally champed they see a starbuck's they maybe will walk around to see the other establishments. they can work together. i think it's a big question but we have to look at all those situations as we - the final thing i want to fengs e.r. mention, is whether or not we should have any particular consideration for a san francisco-based company. you don't want to have any prejudice over one company or another but if there's any way we can give some particular preference or consideration to companies particularly those who
have their headquarters here and employ a lot of employees. it might give an incentive for companies to relocate those. those are some of my ideas >> i want to for the sake of being brief. unfortunately, i don't have a hat to pass around but i want that a study of this kind probably requires more than 40 thousand and i would like to have perhaps everybody in the city family in order to do this correct and in a balanced way to
see how you could garner some additional support. the background and memo in front of us is good background information and thought provoking i recommend the 3 of you who i attached to the memo for this particular piece of work i think it sets the right basis for wanting to engage in this effort in an balanced way. i'm appreciative of the comments made and would like you to consider to broadened the process of scoping including neighborhood activists and the appropriate people who have been in this battle for many years as
the founding both sides board of how to do that. i want to talk about my particular professional - the professional who could do the respectable there's a strong physical element to it. and there's a strong urban design understanding the staevenlgz for like san francisco. but i think the understanding of what the issues are and the time to unify and creating uniform citywide policy with specific criteria it's a huge piece and i'd like for a second could you
considering doing the work? >> we're looking at securing an economic consultant we have a list of 3 pre-qualified consultants and we have a balance of wide issues to look at. we know that there may not be a lot of patience for to wait for the complete study. so we're going to be asking the economic consultant to slice the issue and look at it associate economic issues to look at a couple of case studies in the neighborhoods so we can compare and contrast. we want to collaborate with the other departments and i also the
last piece would be looking at the and i terrific things. it's a board and ambitious plan and we're trying to get informed before the decisions are made. the only words i appreciate this dripths first year but again there's not a science to economic trends not a civil ball. it's really an open ended dialog because we're all searching for the right answers and it's not
to slam the door in formula retail but having san francisco to have answers on how to do that interest i think we want to kind of define the rules by which we invite people to the table. our goals with the limited study with the limited amount of time and fund to actually have public hearings before this commission and there's a representative of 4 members in the audience who are going to hold the meeting as we go along so we can update the commission. and, of course, the study is something 110 north we as a department can do so ultimately, the board of supervisors will decide how to interpreter.
the policy recommendations will billed off of that. that will include the discussions and for that i'd like to ask we hand the hat around >> commissioner. >> yeah. i want to thank everybody for their work on this. i do hope there's a way we can include have a public scoping meeting whether it's the planning department i understand the limited costs and you're trying 40 not to over due the costs. but there's an opportunity for people to provide an input i think that would be helpful. i actually am concerned that the budget probably is not enough. one of the things that will be interesting to look at there is
information about trends in retail. everyone knows that's the death of the shopping mall as we're a talking about it today, people are not choosing a lot of the the big boxed retailers manufacture is being purchased on line. so to the extend that looking the future of retail is could be a part of how we looked at that. you know, we would hate to come up with a whole bunch of policies that don't apply. so i that it would be useful if we could understand san francisco overall market size. and we don't even know there's a market meanwhile for some many
spaces i think of that when we were looking at new york city and they were minimum missing lobbies and stuff but how many should there be. in terms of of the type issues i think looking at the study when you're looking and comparing the formula championships and the question is if there's a cheap that has thousands of stores maybe we account look at the locates and revenues. especially in the margins being quite low. also the roll of anchor roles. like the pottery barn is it considered an anchor store and
what are the retails like starbuck's. i think that looking at issues around size and types. i think going back to this groceries or other tech services not provided by local stores. i think the issue around affordability in the types of goods and services arrest there's lots of very affordable clothing stores and things when we're talking about the mix of feeshlt. there's also a difference between formula restaurants and other formula issues that issue has come up quite a bit. and the final thing i do reason
that's interesting is not the nexus by are chances are the multipleer like multiple national retailers not from the bay area. i support guatemala the neighborhood. and i don't know if there's anything we can do with the board to be more patient to do the study we want. it would be a waste of time to do the study and not have it be meaningful. if it's a duplicate of what we've heard before i guess that might be a conversation we want to engage in. how can we make sure that actually happens >> thanks. i want to add a couple of
thoughts. on the question of affordability i'm interested in that. so hate valley and chinatown has led to other outcomes were there $400 shoes like in hate town compared to chinatown which is less expensive. the report is just the report but eventually we'll have the structure that will be tailored neighborhood by neighborhood but will be much more organized but i still i think neighborhood to neighborhood there are different needs and we need to value that. on the question of input i'm in support of a hearing by it's
helpful to hear that the board of supervisors maybe holding other meetings and maybe we can coordinated the process. but there will be other opportunities and the planning department may be able to help with that. on the question of the time out. this seems more unclear to me the next item is the formula item. it's not clear to me yet if we can really hold off until after the study or we have to have some sort of religion after >> that was one thing i wanted to address. the recommendation before you on this one is to generally hold off on those proposals but if a supervisor you as a they can't
hold a recommendation only thing this item would be that structural changes not happen or they do happen at the citywide level and that's with the next item where we're supporting the institution of formula retail controls but the changes we're saying make those to all formula retailers. we would like to hear what you guys have to say thank you okay >> okay. thank you. >> yes, in some ways no matter the outcome of the study or what's happening what happens there we're not going to backpedal from proposition g. so i think the policy